User talk:Srpska1992

  1. Home
  2. Wiki

Welcome!

[edit]
A plate of chocolate chip cookies.
Welcome!

Hello, Srpska1992, and welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Below are some pages you might find helpful. For a user-friendly interactive help forum, see the Wikipedia Teahouse.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, please see our help pages, and if you can't find what you are looking for there, please feel free to ask me on my talk page or place {{Help me}} on this page and someone will drop by to help. Again, welcome! Liz Read! Talk! 06:51, 25 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia: check out the Teahouse!

[edit]
Teahouse logo
Hello! Srpska1992, you are invited to the Teahouse, a forum on Wikipedia for new editors to ask questions about editing Wikipedia, and get support from peers and experienced editors. Please join us! Liz Read! Talk! 06:51, 25 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Introduction to contentious topics

[edit]

You have recently edited a page related to the Balkans or Eastern Europe, a topic designated as contentious. This is a brief introduction to contentious topics and does not imply that there are any issues with your editing.

A special set of rules applies to certain topic areas, which are referred to as contentious topics. These are specially designated topics that tend to attract more persistent disruptive editing than the rest of the project and have been designated as contentious topics by the Arbitration Committee. When editing a contentious topic, Wikipedia’s norms and policies are more strictly enforced, and Wikipedia administrators have an expanded level of powers and discretion in order to reduce disruption to the project.

Within contentious topics, editors should edit carefully and constructively, refrain from disrupting the encyclopedia, and:

Editors are advised to err on the side of caution if unsure whether making a particular edit is consistent with these expectations. If you have any questions about contentious topics procedures, you may ask them at the arbitration clerks' noticeboard or you may learn more about this contentious topic here. You may also choose to note which contentious topics you know about by using the {{Ctopics/aware}} template. Sesquilinear (talk) 11:58, 25 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

May 2025

[edit]

Stop icon Your recent editing history at Radovan Karadžić shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war; read about how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you do not violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.
I would advise you to self-revert and continue discussing. Edit warring is edit warring, regardless of whether you are right or not. StephenMacky1 (talk) 12:57, 25 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello srpska. Due to me assisting, and getting his wikipedia a picture. Gunther Fehlinger has, on his own accord, sent me a bunch of news article, a PDF, and a bunch of images of him being on physical newspapers. With him showing his notability.

I know you are an actor in good faith, and therefore I do hope you will assist me in going through the entire email he sent me.

If you agree, do you have an email I can send it to? Or somewhere else that can be used for this kind of situation.

Your experience in wikipedia will greatly help me out here.

With best regards JonasJorgensen4 (talk) JonasJorgensen4 (talk) 09:01, 13 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, and good evening. I personally, with all due respect, don't really have the time to comb through the mentioned sources. However, I do think there's plenty of editors out there willing to do so.
Regarding your comment about my "aggressive" tone you made earlier (might as well kill two birds with one stone and comment on that here), my apologies if I came off that way. I suppose that's just a symptom of how I type, but I don't harbor any ill will against you or the subject of the AfD. Best regards to you too. Srpska1992 (talk) 02:40, 14 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hello! Thank you for taking the time to respond.
No worries mate! As long as we have learnt from our mistakes, its no problem lol! And I understand why you may not have the time to comb over like… 30 links or more.
May you have a wonderful day!
With best regards
JonasJorgensen4 (talk) JonasJorgensen4 (talk) 14:31, 14 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]